UMED ALI Vs. NAWAB KHAJE HABIBULLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise out of suits for recovery of rent and also for enhancement of rent on the ground of a rise in the prices of staple food crops.

(2.) The defence was that the rent was not liable to enhancement and the defendants relied upon the presumption under Section 50 of the Bengal Tenancy Act.

(3.) The learned Subordinate Judge says: The defendants have not exhibited their dakhilas. They, however, rely upon the plaintiffs papers to show that their jamas have not been altered for the last 20 years. But I do not think that the presumption under Section 50 of the Bengal Tenancy Act can help the case for the defense in any way, for the presumption has been rebutted by the plaintiffs. The talab baki of 1281 goes to show that the jamas originally payable by the defendants were altered in that year."